Quote:
|
Originally Posted by chevypower
I would say that it is more inertia more than momentum. Momentum suggests that the higher the velocity, the less mass plays a part. Eg a Ford Fiesta hits a Hummer H1 in the side at 60 km/h. There was no momentum on the part of the Hummer. The Fiesta is still really going to come off much worse than the Hummer. So it's neither force (m x a) or momentum (m x v). It is inertia, which is totally independent from velocity.
|
Yes, I agree, though your point has been confirmed by myself and others a number of times throughout the thread: "there is no substitute for mass in a collision" (let's assume the only gyroscopic devices we have in vehicles are the wheels and the engine)
I do feel however, though you have used the term inertia correctly(a very rare thing in this world), (though inertial mass would be even better) it will confuse the average person as most throw around the terms of inertia and momentum not realising there is a difference, just using "mass" and leaving the term inertia completely out of the discussion is much simpler for the "masses"